When someone agrees with you -- and I understand this may be rare -- do you often think, "Boy, that fellow is spot on? I found his comments about agreeing with me very fulfilling."
Authority though carries a lot of weight and studies have shown that people will often do things that they might not otherwise when an authority figure tells them to. Dealing with a situation like this I don't find it surprising that the woman might've changed her testimony when a uniformed officer with a badge said she heard things wrong. That strikes me as witness tampering. Besides that though other witnesses say they heard Martin yelling so her account is corroborated to some extent by others.
I fully agree. Even if Zimmerman is fully exonerated this case is very disturbing. I still think the biggest thing this situation shows is how messed up FL's Stand Your Ground law is. As I expressed in the other thread I think the Stand Your Ground principle is problematic but is even more so in the case of how vague FL's statute is. Bottom line for me is even if Zimmerman acted in accord with FL's law he was still very irresponsible. Trayvon Martin is dead and this will likely scar George Zimmerman for life. This could've been avoided if he had just stayed in his car and let the police do their job.
Some post on Twitter said this, and I couldn't agree more: You know you live in a really messed up country when somebody pours flour on Kim Kardashian's head and gets arrested on the spot, yet a man shoots an unarmed 17 year old dead and goes home free with his weapon.
On the other hand, if Zimmerman story is correct, then Martin would still be alive had he chosen not to attack Zimmerman. So, if Zimmerman's account is correct, each made a tragic mistake.
Except that Martin's decision was dependent on Zimmerman's decision. Zimmerman's decision was entirely independent and more or less put Martin in a position to defend himself.
One could say the same thing of Zimmerman. Zimmerman had a right to take a stroll in his own neighborhood without fear of being assaulted.
Yes, but Zimmerman specifically stated he was running after Martin. Getting chased down is enough provocation for Martin's right to self defense.
It's a big if. Also, if Zimmerman hadn't gone into, "Look, a *****r in a white neighborhood, I'm going to be a hero" mode, Trayvon Martin would have had nothing compelling him to confront the dude. Tragic mistake on both parts, at face value, is true.
Exactly. According to recent media reports, Trayvon Martin sucker punched Zimmerman. Without the sucker punch, Martin would be alive.
Even if they both made mistakes, what is the lesser of two evils? Trayvon attacking a guy following him or Zimmerman chasing down a guy (while armed) to do who knows what?
That witness's (Mary Cutcher's) testimony is not very convincing. She was only trying to guess whose voice it was, and she didn't have good context since she couldn't see, nor did she likely know Martin or Zimmerman previously. Read more: http://globalgrind.com/node/828970#ixzz1qQAS3agq
Clearly the sucker punch is much worse, as Zimmerman had a right to pursue Martin. Martin did not have a right to sucker punch Zimmerman.
CNN reports that Zimmerman went to a doctor for treatment for a broken nose. http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/27/justice/florida-teen-shooting-witnesses/index.html
